From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 1 20:57:56 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E449EDD7; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 20:57:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from land.berklix.org (land.berklix.org [144.76.10.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 738A6836; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 20:57:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mart.js.berklix.net (p5DCBDF82.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.203.223.130]) (authenticated bits=128) by land.berklix.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s91Ksq3w024532; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 20:54:55 GMT (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (fire.js.berklix.net [192.168.91.41]) by mart.js.berklix.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s91Kvafq045456; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 22:57:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fire.js.berklix.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s91KvOPb006768; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 22:57:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Message-Id: <201410012057.s91KvOPb006768@fire.js.berklix.net> To: Ed Maste Subject: Re: Media image names - Document & rationalise. From: "Julian H. Stacey" Organization: http://berklix.com BSD Unix Linux Consultants, Munich Germany User-agent: EXMH on FreeBSD http://berklix.com/free/ X-URL: http://www.berklix.com In-reply-to: Your message "Wed, 01 Oct 2014 12:54:33 -0400." Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 22:57:24 +0200 Cc: Glen Barber , freebsd-stable stable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 20:57:57 -0000 Ed Maste wrote: > On 1 October 2014 10:37, Glen Barber wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 03:58:24PM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > >> Maybe there was an explanation of -uefi- on a mail list. One can > >> guess: for [some?] newer machines try uefi. But could we put a more > >> exact purpose of uefi images in a README ? > >> > > > > The UEFI images will be documented in the release announcement email, > > because they are specific to the 10.1-RELEASE cycle. 11.0-RELEASE will > > have the functionality in the default installation medium. > > To be clear, the existing, legacy-only images are built the same way > as they always have been. The reason there are separate -uefi- images > is to avoid accidental regression in legacy-only boot support. > > The 10.1 -uefi- images (as well as the 11.0 images) are actually > dual-mode, and should boot in both UEFI and legacy configurations. > I'm interested in receiving test reports of installations using the > -uefi- images, in both UEFI and legacy boot configurations. > > (Technical detail: The image contains legacy MBR boot code, and is > partitioned using the MBR scheme. One of the MBR partitions is an EFI > system partition of type 0xEF. Legacy boot uses the MBR, while UEFI > loads the first-stage loader /EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI. Both cases use > the same root file system and boot the same kernel.) Thanks Ed, good to know :-) Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Linux Unix C Sys Eng Consultant Munich http://berklix.com Indent previous with "> ". Interleave reply paragraphs like a play script. Send plain text, not quoted-printable, HTML, base64, or multipart/alternative. ShellShock - http://www.berklix.com/~jhs/bash/